122 replies to this topic

[gumgum]

Since I was in the neighbourhood this morning, I took a couple shots of this place.




It would suck if they got rid of that rental apartment in the back.

[aastra]

I agree. And a condo unit in that place would be pretty cool, don't you think? Developers should be looking for opportunities like this, in my opinion.

I'd let the developer go two stories higher on the new building if he can preserve/upgrade the old apartments.

[Rob Randall]

This was recommended to Council quite easily since they were only looking at minor alterations to the plan presented at the previous ADP.

Some neighbours have contacted me concerned about the density of this project.

[G-Man]

I think that the density is fine but the project is bad!! I'll bet a dollar that they really don't care a rat's ass about the density they just are looking for a way to not like it.

[Rob Randall]

Committee of the Whole this Thursday at 9 a.m.: Rezoning Application for Mt. St. Angela.

[VicHockeyFan]

Some folks were on CFAX last week opposing this.

[Ms. B. Havin]

From today's Times-Colonist, letters to the editor:

St. Angela needs better protection
Times Colonist
Published: Monday, July 30, 2007

Re: "Mount St. Angela process flawed," July 26.

The letter concerning the flawed process of notification about the drastic changes to the unique Mount St Angela building is well justified.

[...]

© Times Colonist (Victoria) 2007
http://www.canada.co... ... 9897b01e13

I find the bolded bits somewhat demagogic, quite honestly. I haven't seen the plans or models for this, so I'm not decided in my own mind, although my gut instinct is to question it, certainly. But I don't think that a case of overshadowing is "serious threat" (as Turner suggests) or that "massive profits" somehow materialize from "densification." That whole "massive profits" thing always gets my hackles up, FWIW, because it strikes me as a cheap, often spectacular, shot for the benefit of people who have no idea how markets or economies work.

[Holden West]

[From today's Times-Colonist, letters to the editor:]
Council has established two hearings during the summer months when most people are on vacation.

So no meetings between May and September. Of course, you can't schedule a meeting during Spring Break either; that's a busy time too. And forget about having a community meeting in December--that's a write off. Then there's Fall Equinox, Louis Riel's birthday, Gluten Allergy Awareness Week and Ramadan.

Those scheming bastard developers.

[aastra]

Council has established two hearings during the summer months when most people are on vacation.

Do "most people" really take all of August off and leave town for the duration? If that's the case, methinks "most people" are in a very different tax bracket than the one I'm in.

The developer is proposing two massive condominium blocks on the site that would overshadow this heritage building.

I want to make the point that I'm not much of a fan of this project, and I'd be very disappointed if they demolished Mount St. Angela's 1912 addition. I believe we chip away Victoria's old urban character bit by bit when we get rid of buildings like that (the old-and-nice-but-not-noteworthy-or-impressive-enough-to-be-saved kind).

That said, I just despise the way the opposition pads their case with misplaced fearmongering. If a lowrise apartment block constitutes "massive" then that neighbourhood is packed to the gills with massive buildings already (red dots, and not including the cathedral), so what's the problem? Heck, many of the existing buildings (blue dots) have larger footprints than the proposed buildings could ever have.



And how come it was okay to wipe out blocks and blocks of old homes and buildings to build all of those Fairfield apartment blocks? Why are we drawing the line now?

(I'm not saying bad decisions in the past somehow justify bad decisions in the present; I'm merely observing the hypocrisy.)

[Ms. B. Havin]

Carolyn Heiman reports[/url:52205] in today's T-C on the Fairfield Community Association-hosted meeting about Mount St. Angela. Here are some excerpts:

Heritage advocates split on project
Opinions divided on plans for Mount St. Angela property
Carolyn Heiman, Times Colonist
Published: Wednesday, August 01, 2007

(... snip...)

The multi-faceted plan calls for twin, six-storey condominium buildings on the McClure side of the site and existing heritage buildings to front Burdett Avenue by relocating two of them. A third house not considered of heritage importance is to be moved, possibly to Fernwood to be used for affordable housing.

The historic Mount St. Angela, first used as an Anglican college, then a hotel before becoming a home for retired Catholic nuns, will be restored and turned into nine subsidized units for single, elderly women.

[...]
[URL="http://www.canada.com/victoriatimescolonist/news/capital_van_isl/story.html?id=e840447d-bbb0-415c-97d0-d8e9e0e83bbc"]http://www.canada.com/victoriatimescolo ... e9e0e83bbc

FWIW, I believe [url=http://www.talonbooks.com/index.cfm?event=authorDetails&authorID=117:52205]Donald[/url:52205] [url=http://www.abebooks.com/docs/CompanyInformation/PressRoom/05012004.shtml:52205]Luxton[/url:52205] was in the audience and that he's on board with this project. I don't see how it can get a higher or better ok for "heritage vetting" than that.

Oh, and PS: I said earlier that I wasn't decided on this, but after seeing the proposal last night and hearing the proponents, I'm in favour. There might still be some tweaking for the McClure frontage, but overall it looks pretty good.

[G-Man]

David Turner is a real case man.

He said the height of the buildings is too tall, dwarfing the iconic Mount St. Angela building. "That's what's happening in Vancouver and we don't want to be Vancouver."

What does this even mean? They are building 6 storey buildings all over the place? Aastra can you confirm this? I was not aware of this new trend in Vancouver design.

Or perhaps he is referring to the dwarfing of iconic heritage buildings? Is this happening in Vancouver? What exactly is going on over there in that crazy city?

[aastra]

I presume Mr. Turner was referring to the fad of building lowrise condo buildings beside historic nunneries, which -- as you all know -- is rampant in Vancouver.

They pointed out in the 90s already that the 4 storey limit was too low, that it should be 6, but their input was ignored.

How the heck did they arrive at that 4 story limit anyway? The Christchurch Cathedral is closer to 20 stories than four. St. Ann's is the equivalent of what...six or seven stories? That big white (old) apartment block on the next block south of Mount St. Angela is what...seven or eight stories?

[Holden West]

He said the height of the buildings is too tall, dwarfing the iconic Mount St. Angela building. "That's what's happening in Vancouver and we don't want to be Vancouver."

David Turner must be referring to the Christ Church Cathedral in Vancouver:



Then again, what Mayor Moonbeam is really thinking is anyone's guess.

[Nparker]

David Turner must be referring to the Christ Church Cathedral in Vancouver:



Then again, what Mayor Moonbeam is really thinking is anyone's guess.[/quote]

I really like the way these highrises frame Christ Church. It reminds me of St. Paul's Cathedral in NYC. I fail to see how classical eclesiastical architecture and contemporary highrises cannot co-exist side-by-side. It seems to me their differences make each more exciting....also what is wrong with trying to be a bit like Vancouver anyway? When did Vancouver become the "enemy"

[Rob Randall]

To clarify: David Turner used the phrase "...we don't want to be a mini-Vancouver".

The speakers had a variety of concerns, adherence to the Humboldt Valley Plan, parking and height. One person expressed concern the fountain would be used by homeless people to do their laundry. Another said emergency vehicles would be impeded. One man said that in a moderate earthquake, rubble would tumble to the road, blocking rescuers and resulting in deaths.

The McClure side of the buildings in the new drawings seem much improved over the older model. I don't see much room for compromise at this point. I suppose the project will either go ahead as proposed or it will fail.

[Caramia]

One person expressed concern the fountain would be used by homeless people to do their laundry.

I really hope Rob that at this point you spoke up and explained the complex ecology of Victoria cougars, Humbolt Valley raccoons, and innocent laundry doing crack-heads, who after all, just want to be clean!

[G-Man]

Strange how many homeless you see in all the fountains downtown currently...

And what is this collapsing building thing? I mean this is a new building one would assume it will be built to some sort of earthquake standard right?

What is a mini-Vancouver?

[aastra]

Those "mini-Vancouver" remarks will bug me to my grave. So the only difference between Victoria and Vancouver is what...the number of highrises? (or in this case, lowrises) Or is Victoria supposed to be the Vancouver that time forgot?

There's a "Vancouver first, Victoria second" attitude in those remarks. It's as if they're afraid that any perceived similarities between Victoria and Vancouver will only hurt Victoria, because -- you know -- Victoria just isn't in the same league. Everybody will just up and leave if it ever dawns on them that Vancouver is basically the same only much better. Tourists will stop coming here if it ever dawns on them that Vancouver is basically the same only much better.

Why watch NHL hockey? NBA basketball is basically the same only much better.

[G-Man]

^ That is exactly what that means to me too! Good way of putting it.

[Nparker]

I am just not sure what is wrong with being like Vancouver. I understand it is Canada's # 1 rated city.

Vancouver tops ranking of Canadian cities
CanWest News Service
Published: Thursday, August 02, 2007

CALGARY -- Planning a cross-Canada road trip? Here are a few suggestions: Eat, drink and shop in Montreal, check out a ball game and a museum in Toronto, hunt for a new job in Calgary -- then settle down in Vancouver.

These are the findings of a national poll of Canadians rating this country's cities from coast to coast.

Vancouver got top honours in an Angus Reid poll and was ranked best city in Canada, with 13 per cent of the votes; best city to live in, with 14 per cent; and favourite city to vacation in, with 23 per cent.

[...]

Calgary Herald